Well, money can be exchanged. But OK - a book of $20 value. You’re on.
You’re on, too.
All the way home from The Rev, we kept saying “But was he better than Damon?”
Leo’s a shoo-in for the Oscar. What’s more I think he deserves it.
I have no insider knowledge about how the vote will go, but I do know all kinds of considerations go into voting besides the quality of the work.
99% of us don’t remember Joe McCarthy or HUAC and never think about them. But to Hollywood’s elderly leftists (and they are legion), those are the most important things in American history, which gives Bryan Cranston a solid shot at winning.
And Eddie Redmayne gives Hollywood a chance to make another pro-LGBT statement.
So Leo ain’t a shoe in.
Cranston’s movie wasn’t that great, and he hasn’t been in Hollywood very long. He’s still primarily considered a TV star. Redmayne would be a good bet if he hadn’t won last year.
Leo gave a stellar and demanding performance in a sweeping epic of a movie and he has been unrecognized for other great performances in the past. This is the academy’s chance to give it to him without snubbing someone equally deserving. I agree he’s a lock.
Gary Oldman?
I would’ve gladly given Oscars to Alan Rickman (Sense and Sensibility), Bradley Cooper (Limitless), Harrison Ford (SWVII) and Edward Woodward (Breaker Morant).
Leo let a bear hump him. The Oscar is in the bag. Last time he was seen, the bear was still smiling.
Woo hoo! Material Things!
You have now said this in two different threads. No such thing happened. Have you actually *seen *the film?
I told a joke about Leo and the bear a couple times about a silly movie. Of course the stories (on the net) about the bear humping him are exaggerations and untrue. But they are quite funny. 
We’re going to see it in a couple days. I’ve read reviews and know most of the story. Saw the original movie about Hugh Glass when I was a kid.
No spoilers, dammit!
Wait… what do you think “hack” means?
I don’t like your choices because I voted ‘Yes’ but not because “I love Leo, be the ‘King of the World!’”
I just think that voting in the Oscars has proven to be political.
I still think there should be a second set of Oscars where the movies has to be X number of years old. When you go back and look at the Oscars from the past, there are so many times you want to say “How the hell did THAT movie win over THIS movie?”
Leo just announced he is giving away $15 million dollars to save the world. He is going all-out to get that Oscar this year… I would not be surprised to find him on death’s door the night of the ceremony.
Nobody thinks “Scent of a Woman” was Al Pacino’s best work, or that “Training Day” was Denzel Washington’s. They won Oscars because voters thought, “It’s his turn.”
If Leo wins, it will have less to do with his performance in “The Revenant” than with a general sense that Leo has paid his dues and it’s his turn to win.
Training Day Oscar only went to Washington because Russell Crowe had a managed to alienate pretty everyone by then and he suffered being “the defending champion”.
Washington’s best performance was in Queen and Country
It was also because he played so dramatically against type. He’d made a career of being a bastion of nobility and clean cut values–smart, principled, generous. He’d never played a truly bad guy before, and the Academy also likes it when actors go out of their comfort zones.
PMs sent. Congrats, guys - you (and Leo) won, fair and square.